'Dangerous' new protocols curtail artistic expression

Gabriella Coslovich and Geoff Strong

ONE of Australia's leading novelists has warned that there is more to fear from the new puritanism in Australian politics than from any potential threat to children and adolescents from artists.

Responding to the moral panic surrounding photographer Bill Henson and his depiction of adolescents, award-winning author Frank Moorhouse denounced the "crude" response of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to Henson's work and the Federal Government's instruction to the Australia Council to establish protocols for the depiction of children in art.

Moorhouse described the creation of these funding protocols as "the most dangerous movement in the arts in my life time". "Creating protocols is itself an infringement of freedom of the arts, especially when they form part of the guidelines of the central, publicly funded, arts funding body.

"If the Australia Council wanted to protect and promote art, it would oppose this directive from government," he said, during his keynote address at the National Young Writers Festival in Newcastle at the weekend.

Advertisement

Moorhouse has outlined his objections in a submission to the Australia Council. The deadline was last month. The protocols will be a condition of funding for projects supported by the Australia Council and other government arts agencies and are expected to be in place early next year.

In its call for submissions, the Australia Council asked that four critical issues be addressed: the rights of children to be protected throughout the artistic process; ensuring that everyone viewing the artwork had an appropriate understanding of the nature and artistic content of the material; protecting images of children from being exploited, including the use of images beyond the original context of the creative work; and creating protocols that acknowledged the Australia Council's statutory role in upholding and promoting the right of people to freedom in the practice of the arts.

Moorhouse believes that the protocols are unworkable and contradictory. How can you ensure that everyone viewing an art work has an appropriate understanding of it, he asked, and how, in the digital age, can you guarantee that images of children are not exploited or moved beyond their original context?

"From what we understand about pedophilia, and even all forms of sexual arousal, an infinite range of otherwise innocent and 'passive' images are co-opted for sexual stimulation by (those with) this mental illness," he said.

Parental judgement, the judgement of the artist, child welfare acts and various union and professional association guidelines on the employment of children as models should be enough to ensure the safety of children in the making of art, Moorhouse said.

"Statistically, if we are worried about pedophilia, we should be more worried about priests entering schools than artists. To my knowledge, there have been no cases of (convicted) pedophile artists in schools," he said.

But Australia Council chief executive Kathy Keele defended the protocols. "The Australia Council supports freedom of artistic expression. However, artists must abide by the same laws and community standards that apply to every other citizen," she said.

"The protocols will not censor artists, but rather ensure the rights of children are protected throughout the artistic process, from the time an artwork is created through to when it is shown."